\n
That\u2019s based on 70 percent of Sands China\u2019s profits in the gambling hub, from the launch of the Sands Macao in 2004 through to 2022, the year the license expires.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\nBut LVS says the partnership officially ended on Jan. 15, 2002. It claims it approached AAEC shortly before that date hoping to agreement that would define their partnership moving forward.<\/p>\n
The American company wanted to become a major shareholder in AAEC because it felt that would help grease the skids on the bid.<\/p>\n
LVS claims AAEC rejected the overture.<\/p>\n
He Said, Hao Said<\/strong><\/h2>\nAAEC pegs the date the relationship ended as February 2001, after LVS had held talks with Galaxy. It claims a memorandum of agreement and a letter of intent, both allegedly signed by the then-LVS president and CEO William Weidner, outlined the continuation of the relationship.<\/p>\n
LVS has alleged these documents are falsified.<\/p>\n
\n
On Tuesday, Judge Seng said the court could not rule on whether the documents were falsified or not. But they should be discounted because the plaintiff could not explain when and how they were able to access these documents.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\u201cThis matter involved great financial interests. Both sides were well-educated with a lot of experiences in the business world, as well as supported by cross-jurisdiction legal teams,\u201d Seng said, as translated by Macau Business.<\/em><\/p>\n\u201cIf they had really had the initiative to extend the letter of intent [at the time], it is reasonable to presume they would have established a written agreement,\u201d Seng added.<\/p>\n
The judge is expected to put an end to the 20-year-old dispute in the coming weeks.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A judge in Macau\u2019s Court of First Instance appears to be siding with Las Vegas Sands Corp\u2019s (LVS) defense of a monstruous $7.5 billion breach-of-contract lawsuit, dating back 20 years. Judge Seng Ioi Man said Tuesday there was no evidence that the contract in question extended beyond 15 January 2002, the date LVS claims it […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":36,"featured_media":201678,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[62,60],"tags":[],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Macau Court is Siding with LVS in $7.5B Breach of Contract Case<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n